Legal Opinion
Thompson v. Auditor General
Michigan Supreme Court
Decided February 10, 1933No. Calendar 37,109PublishedCited by 65 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtPotter, J.
Plaintiff seeks mandamus against the auditor general to compel him to furnish for publication the descriptions of real estate delinquent for taxes, to be sold in Ingham county in 1933.
1. It is objected that in effect this is a suit against the State, and may not be maintained.
“No doctrine is better settled than that the State cannot be compelled to respond in any court unless it has conferred such a privilege on suitors.” Auditor General v. Tuscola County Treasurer, 73 Mich. 28.
It was settled in Chisholm v. Georgia, 2 Dall. (2 U. S.) 419, that a State might, under the judiciary act of 1789,…
2Cases cited46 opinions
- Ex Parte YoungSupreme Court of the United States · 1908
- Hans v. LouisianaSupreme Court of the United States · 1890
- United States v. LeeSupreme Court of the United States · 1882
- Hebert v. LouisianaSupreme Court of the United States · 1926
- State Bd. of Tax Commr's of Ind. v. JacksonSupreme Court of the United States · 1931
41 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by65 opinions
- Cady v. City of DetroitMichigan Supreme Court · 1939
- Taxpayers of Michigan Against Casinos v. StateMichigan Supreme Court · 2004
- Aft Michigan v. State of MichiganMichigan Supreme Court · 2015
- Fritts v. KrughMichigan Supreme Court · 1958
- C. F. Smith Co. v. FitzgeraldMichigan Supreme Court · 1935
60 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.